Canada - You Have a Country You Should be Proud Of!

[Wilber]

I thought your country settled this on the Plains of Abraham.

Nope, that was between two European colonial powers. Canada as a country didn't exist for another 108 years.

[Peter F]

Our constitution defines it as a crime. Since it's in the constitution it can't be unconstitutional.

Perhaps your country would be even greater than it is if Quebec didn't have a gun to your heads constantly, and French weren't being rammed down everyone's throats. If they can force French on you why do English-speakers in Quebec have no rights?

Having lived in Quebec as an Englishspeaking person I politely suggest that you have no idea of what you speak. French is not rammed down anyones throat any more than English is rammed down every other Canadians throat. In fact far less.

It is interesting that your complaint is that your misinformed view leads you to the conclusion that Canada is not as great as it could be.

I ask whats the point of being Great? Do we Canadians require Greatness? What are we missing by not being Great?

Is Greatness free or doe's it have a cost?

You come from a great nation...tell us what we are missing

[Peter F]

I thought your country settled this on the Plains of Abraham.

Why would you think that? The Quebec Act was one of the Intolerable Acts that led to your country's act of rebellion against lawful authority. I am surprised that an American doesn't know what the Plains of Abraham was about.

[Peter F]

Our constitution defines it as a crime. Since it's in the constitution it can't be unconstitutional.

You're constitution seems to be at odds with freedom in this regard. What is so frightfull about somebody voting for seperatists? They may actually win a seat or two in the house of Reps? A true democracy would allow people to elect whoever they want. Wasn't that a significant point of the Revolution? Representation; The lack of? And yet your constitution deny's representation to those who seek it in a lawful manner?

Very strange.

'

[Peter F]

Americans fought the most costly war in their history to decide this same issue in their own country. It is no longer an issue. That should give you a clue.

Well, here's a clue for you: The US civil war started when rebellious persons declared thier states to be independant of the USofA.

Prior to that there was muchy debate and elections and voting regarding the issue's of wich states would be allowed slavery and wich would not.

So Americans took up arms against each other not because of debates and elections but because of overt armed rebellion.

Until such a point is reached - debate's and elections are good things.

[Wilber]

Well, here's a clue for you: The US civil war started when rebellious persons declared thier states to be independant of the USofA.

Prior to that there was muchy debate and elections and voting regarding the issue's of wich states would be allowed slavery and wich would not.

So Americans took up arms against each other not because of debates and elections but because of overt armed rebellion.

Until such a point is reached - debate's and elections are good things.

Duceppe is not about succession? His aim is not to split this country? The southern states would not be allowed to succeed regardless of any amount debate. jbg is not the first American I have heard expressing mystification at our tolerance of those who would break up this country. I would say it is more the norm than the exception among Americans. The view their country very differently and although they have regional differences as great as ours, secession is not an issue for anyone in any State. We will talk and elect our way into being a nonentity, or at best a country that tries so hard to be everything to everyone, it will no longer mean anything to anyone.

[AngusThermopyle]

Having lived in Quebec as an Englishspeaking person I politely suggest that you have no idea of what you speak. French is not rammed down anyones throat any more than English is rammed down every other Canadians throat. In fact far less.

I don't know which Quebec you lived in but it cant be the same one I lived in. Rather than fabricate points to support your argument you should try the truth, it can be refreshing.

The fact that the entire structure of the "language laws" blows your contention out of the water is probably lost on you.

Edited May 10, 2008 by AngusThermopyle

[jbg]

Why would you think that? The Quebec Act was one of the Intolerable Acts that led to your country's act of rebellion against lawful authority. I am surprised that an American doesn't know what the Plains of Abraham was about.

I have met two schoolteachers from Peterborough, Ontario who didn't know who Montcalm and Wolfe were.

[eyeball]

Canada allows people like Mssr Duceppe to run in open and free elections. That is a good thing, jbg, and I cannot fathom why you would consider that objectionable.

The development of the Bloc is just fine as far as I'm concerned. The Bloc will probably ensure that no Liberal or Conservative will ever hold a majority for a long long time in this country. This is indeed a good thing.

[Sean Hayward]

The development of the Bloc is just fine as far as I'm concerned. The Bloc will probably ensure that no Liberal or Conservative will ever hold a majority for a long long time in this country. This is indeed a good thing.

That is indeed a bad thing. Minority governments are prone to extreme partisanship, legislative deadlock, and lack of direction. The only exception is Pearson in the 60's.

[Sean Hayward]

Americans can be difficult to understand. They fought a war to become independent from a country which they felt was being oppressive and then, less than a century later, fought a much bloodier war to prevent part of their country which felt it was being oppressed from becoming independent.

[eyeball]

jbg is not the first American I have heard expressing mystification at our tolerance of those who would break up this country. I would say it is more the norm than the exception among Americans. The view their country very differently and although they have regional differences as great as ours, secession is not an issue for anyone in any State.

Americans are afraid of their government whereas in Canada the government is afraid of the people, as it should be.

We will talk and elect our way into being a nonentity, or at best a country that tries so hard to be everything to everyone, it will no longer mean anything to anyone.

I think this capacity for change will allow us to evolve into something more realistic. Americans, despite all the rhetoric of Barack Obama, seem more fearful of change and its no surprise they're a more conservative people. Perhaps our being born out of an empire that disintegrated more or less peacefully has imbued us with a more Zen-like attitude towards nationalism. Nothing lasts for ever and its no big deal, we're a people who can rise above ourselves.

[Oleg Bach]

Americans can be difficult to understand. They fought a war to become independent from a country which they felt was being oppressive and then, less than a century later, fought a much bloodier war to prevent part of their country which felt it was being oppressed from becoming independent.

What I find nasty regarding the historical vasilation of values that America is guilty of - is the fact that the civil war in part was fought to remove the curse of slavery from the nation...BUT now! The Americans do a firm and thriving buisness with the hugest slave labour camp on the planet earth...CHINA! So what's that all about? Where is there supposed historic sense of good principle..apparently the dollar is god and that is their greatest strenghth - quickly becoming their greatest weakness that will in time collapse this empire. As far as being proud of Canada as country (territory) - Yes I am proud of the land itself but not that proud of the Nation (extended family) - they tend to also parrot the American lack of value and principle regarding human rights...China is a nation in total slavery..and we do buisness with them and encourage their barbaric behaviour so a few of us can benefit finacially while the rest of us suffer.

[Guest American Woman]

What I find nasty regarding the historical vasilation of values that America is guilty of - is the fact that the civil war in part was fought to remove the curse of slavery from the nation...

No it wasn't. It was fought to preserve the union.

[Guest American Woman]

Americans can be difficult to understand. They fought a war to become independent from a country which they felt was being oppressive and then, less than a century later, fought a much bloodier war to prevent part of their country which felt it was being oppressed from becoming independent.

The U.S. was a colony of Britain when we fought for our independence, not "part of the country;" and as such, we didn't have representation, and felt that was unfair. (The "no taxation without representation" line of thought). The South was part of our nation, and as such, had representation. So the situations were not the same. Furthermore, I'm guessing the Canadian government and most Canadians would not take kindly to Quebec taking up arms against Canada.

[Oleg Bach]

The U.S. was a colony of Britain when we fought for our independence, not "part of the country;" and as such, we didn't have representation, and felt that was unfair. (The "no taxation without representation" line of thought). The South was part of our nation, and as such, had representation. So the situations were not the same. Furthermore, I'm guessing the Canadian government and most Canadians would not take kindly to Quebec taking up arms against Canada.

That's exactly it. The covenant or contract with Britian had been breached prior 1776. As with all contracts it must be a two way street. You pay tax and in return recieve favour. If you are doing you good bit by sending money and nothing is coming back then you are but a slave. The issue of slavery has always been the core of American problems..freedom is paramount as is a fair playing field. At present with the state of affiars concerning the federal reserve - America is putting money into the "bank account" but the common guy donating is not allowed to with draw for their own need.

This is very similar to that took place with the establishment of the Vatican and so-called Christianity..The saint Peter principle that it was built on was a breach of corporate Christian doctrine. eg - "sell your property and put the money in a common purse where one could with draw as according to need". Well what happened with Christianity - the first great corporate socialism was that Christians payed into the fund - but were not allowed to with draw from the fund...hording by the church leaders took place and the contract was broken, probably from the very begining...IF you are to have a social contract...IF I am going to be good to you and give then I expect that you also give and keep the finacial part flowing in a healthy manner...only a FOOL gives and expects nothing in return.

[Fortunata]

If there were real Canadian pride

Let me see if I got this straight ... if we don't spell words with American spelling we are spelling them wrong; if we don't rah rah rah all about the place we are not proud of our country; if we don't stomp and prosecute dissension then we don't make the grade; if we don't celebrate our "Canadianness" with as much visual gusto as Americans we are not patriotic? To sum up then, if we are not just like you then we don't rate?

I have met two schoolteachers from Peterborough, Ontario who didn't know who Montcalm and Wolfe were.

Uh huh. I bet.

[Wilber]

Americans are afraid of their government whereas in Canada the government is afraid of the people, as it should be.

Perhaps Canadians should be a little more afraid of their government. Politicians on both sides of the border have to get elected. Fear of the people is universal in that respect.

The development of the Bloc is just fine as far as I'm concerned. The Bloc will probably ensure that no Liberal or Conservative will ever hold a majority for a long long time in this country. This is indeed a good thing.

You mean checks and balances as in the US system?

[Guest American Woman]

quote=eyeball: Americans are afraid of their government whereas in Canada the government is afraid of the people, as it should be.

I'm not the least bit afraid of my government.

[Guest American Woman]

quote=eyeball: I think this capacity for change will allow us to evolve into something more realistic. Americans, despite all the rhetoric of Barack Obama, seem more fearful of change and its no surprise they're a more conservative people. Perhaps our being born out of an empire that disintegrated more or less peacefully has imbued us with a more Zen-like attitude towards nationalism. Nothing lasts for ever and its no big deal, we're a people who can rise above ourselves.

Americans most definitely can rise above themselves, too. We aren't all that different from you in the long run. And since you brought up Canada's peaceful separation from Britain vs. ours, one could say fighting for independence rather than being subservient to what we felt was being unfairly imposed on us would be the epitome of 'not being afraid of change.' After all, we were willing to put our lives on the line for change.

[Oleg Bach]

quote=eyeball: Americans are afraid of their government whereas in Canada the government is afraid of the people, as it should be.

I'm not the least bit afraid of my government.

The guys that "appoint" Canadian public governance do live in fear..all they have is money..and money is not enough to cut it and rule a nation - you have to be a man - rich or poor..brave..and noble...we don't have that! So lacky henchmen that sit in appointed seats in Ottawa are afraid of the people because their handlers are also.

[Guest American Woman]

jbg-- I find it odd that you, as an American, would be determining what would make Canada "greater." Seems to me making it more like the U.S., which is what you seem to think the aim should be regarding this issue, is pretty close-minded and egotistical. If Canada wants to be bilingual, all the more power to them. If they respect the right for people to speak out against the government, all the more power to them. Seems to me at one time you posted a thread saying how much more 'freedom' the U.S. had regarding speech (didn't you link to that post in this very thread?). Now it seems as if you are criticizing Canada's right to speak out for separation. How can someone be a traitor for speaking their minds? No one has taken up arms against Canada. As an American, I have questioned the whole Quebec separatist thing and been told 'why would we want to force people to be part of our nation?' And you know, that makes sense to me. I can't imagine the U.S. without the South, but that's us. We're not Canada, and Canada's not us; and it seems to me that's the way it should be. Canada is a great nation just as it is.

[Oleg Bach]

jbg-- I find it odd that you, as an American, would be determining what would make Canada "greater." Seems to me making it more like the U.S., which is what you seem to think the aim should be regarding this issue, is pretty close-minded and egotistical. If Canada wants to be bilingual, all the more power to them. If they respect the right for people to speak out against the government, all the more power to them. Seems to me at one time you posted a thread saying how much more 'freedom' the U.S. had regarding speech (didn't you link to that post in this very thread?). Now it seems as if you are criticizing Canada's right to speak out for separation. How can someone be a traitor for speaking their minds? No one has taken up arms against Canada. As an American, I have questioned the whole Quebec separatist thing and been told 'why would we want to force people to be part of our nation?' And you know, that makes sense to me. I can't imagine the U.S. without the South, but that's us. We're not Canada, and Canada's not us; and it seems to me that's the way it should be. Canada is a great nation just as it is.

Spanish National athem, sung to the tune of The Star Spangled Banner? American border guards given ten years for stopping a drug runner with deadly force? America is no longer America. The international mob rules the place. It seems that the good are jailed and the evil are given huge bonus packages. If we are to follow the American example of what national pride and atonomy are then we may as well let China have an office in Parliment and have Ming Chung Slaver be speaker of the house. Does no one know the difference between right or wrong at this point in history? Canada will fall apart unless they get with it and become independent of American ammoral thinking. When I see there is no justice through the words of a lawyer who said to me.."It may be immoral but it is legal" - that quote sums it all up. I as a naive person assume that if something was wrong that there must be a law against it..now so...Legalist have destroyed America because they work for who ever pays the most. Through this phenomena has come the moral and economic falling of the American empire....and we are not far behind. If you can not have justice - you can not have a civilization...just a mobish mess!

[jbg]

We will talk and elect our way into being a nonentity, or at best a country that tries so hard to be everything to everyone, it will no longer mean anything to anyone.

Perfect answer to Peter F. Democracy and secession rights are inconsistent in the sense that when a group or region winds up with a result it doesn't like it can't just take its marbles and leave, provided that the "winners" have not broken the rules previously (as the Brits did before the US declared independence.

[jbg]

Americans can be difficult to understand. They fought a war to become independent from a country which they felt was being oppressive and then, less than a century later, fought a much bloodier war to prevent part of their country which felt it was being oppressed from becoming independent.

The difference is that the people of the United States, including Southerners, jointly entered into a compact called a Constitution. Its source was "we the people". The people were thus entitled to their rights ae Americans, separate and apart from what their constituent state governments or slaveholders thought.

A part of the US is not free to leave as it wishes.